Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,049 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 156,107
Pageviews Today: 265,845Threads Today: 82Posts Today: 1,659
03:55 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Evolution

 
Little Lost
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 03:16 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Evolution
Here is a rough depiction of evolution.



Lightening strike, magic happens. Heres where I'm struggling. That accounts for one life form. How do you account for all the varients of life and trees and plants? Were they all created by individual lightening strikes to create their own variation of what evolution leads them to become in something like present day? What was different about all these lightening strikes to create the variations we see now in forms of life? What about the water? Where did that come from? Am I to believe earth was bombarded with ice meteors or something to that effect? That's quite a strike given the volume of water? The lightening strikes that caused life to form and the ice meteors - how come we dont see this phenomenon occur now? Birth, healing, every resource to sustain each life form, carefully working in balance. So we were created by aliens? Who created them? How did there fluke of evolution occur? Same lightening strike as earth? This fluke phenomenon seems wide spread if it created life else where? Doesnt seem such a fluke if its wide spread on other planets? What am I missing. Do we take for granted what we see and not realise the marvel that is in front of us? Life.

Last Edited by Little Lost on 09/18/2021 03:17 AM
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 03:30 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
The more I question, the more he says makes sense.


1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Romans


Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 04:43 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
bump
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 05:41 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Wasnt looking for trolls, just seeing what I'm missing with all this?
BRIEF

User ID: 79662918
United States
09/18/2021 05:43 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
If macroevolution were true, there would not be billions of different species, there would be one and it would be a bivalve, asexual thing...
I never forgive and I never forget

I am a licensed firearm holder. I will, under protection of law, use lethal force if attacked.

Briefcut4892
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 06:14 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
If macroevolution were true, there would not be billions of different species, there would be one and it would be a bivalve, asexual thing...
 Quoting: BRIEF


This is my thinking as well. The narrsti e doesnt fit.
BRIEF

User ID: 79662918
United States
09/18/2021 06:22 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
If macroevolution were true, there would not be billions of different species, there would be one and it would be a bivalve, asexual thing...
 Quoting: BRIEF


This is my thinking as well. The narrsti e doesnt fit.
 Quoting: Little Lost


Nature would not make things overly complex...Complexity is the result of intelligent design, variety comes from the imagination...
I never forgive and I never forget

I am a licensed firearm holder. I will, under protection of law, use lethal force if attacked.

Briefcut4892
Sol-Kathos

User ID: 72073645
Australia
09/18/2021 07:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
You're correct OP, evolution is bullshit. It's the most sacred dogma of $cience worshipping normies but so don't expect any of them to hear a bad word about their God. What they think is 'evolution' isn't and if you explain to them the principles of Darwinian evolution they do a mental double take. I suspect they like it so much because it makes them feel smart and superior in one go.

The notion things randomly change and sometimes that change is beneficial and that one in a million change manages to sire the rest of the species is completely retarded. Evolution is a theory based on several layers of demonstrably false premises.

$cience zealots will immediately bray at you for being a creation-believing jesus freak because their indoctrination only allows them to believe in extreme ideologies. Just because evolution is silly garbage, doesn't mean that creation myths are true to their literal interpretation.

What we observe in Nature is things adapting to the world around them. But adapting implies conscious interaction with the environment, and materialism can't stand such a notion. That creatures other than man could be aware is an affront to story you are trying to be sold.

Last Edited by Sol-Kathos on 09/18/2021 07:24 AM
Order is tyranny, chaos is freedom
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 07:35 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
You're correct OP, evolution is bullshit. It's the most sacred dogma of $cience worshipping normies but so don't expect any of them to hear a bad word about their God. What they think is 'evolution' isn't and if you explain to them the principles of Darwinian evolution they do a mental double take. I suspect they like it so much because it makes them feel smart and superior in one go.

The notion things randomly change and sometimes that change is beneficial and that one in a million change manages to sire the rest of the species is completely retarded. Evolution is a theory based on several layers of demonstrably false premises.

$cience zealots will immediately bray at you for being a creation-believing jesus freak because their indoctrination only allows them to believe in extreme ideologies. Just because evolution is silly garbage, doesn't mean that creation myths are true to their literal interpretation.

What we observe in Nature is things adapting to the world around them. But adapting implies conscious interaction with the environment, and materialism can't stand such a notion. That creatures other than man could be aware is an affront to story you are trying to be sold.
 Quoting: Sol-Kathos


Great post!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/18/2021 07:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
You're correct OP, evolution is bullshit. It's the most sacred dogma of $cience worshipping normies but so don't expect any of them to hear a bad word about their God. What they think is 'evolution' isn't and if you explain to them the principles of Darwinian evolution they do a mental double take. I suspect they like it so much because it makes them feel smart and superior in one go.

The notion things randomly change and sometimes that change is beneficial and that one in a million change manages to sire the rest of the species is completely retarded. Evolution is a theory based on several layers of demonstrably false premises.

$cience zealots will immediately bray at you for being a creation-believing jesus freak because their indoctrination only allows them to believe in extreme ideologies. Just because evolution is silly garbage, doesn't mean that creation myths are true to their literal interpretation.

What we observe in Nature is things adapting to the world around them. But adapting implies conscious interaction with the environment, and materialism can't stand such a notion. That creatures other than man could be aware is an affront to story you are trying to be sold.
 Quoting: Sol-Kathos


Adaptations are not passed on to future generations unless it is a change in the DNA which would happen at conception and not during life. In other words, survival of the fittest is a reduction in diversity from the existing variability in the DNA by the death and lower reproduction rates. No new information is added to the gene pool. New or different information is supposedly added through mutations (mistakes). The overwhelming majority if not all mutations are not beneficial to the organism so it does not survive or become dominant. Survival of the fittest prevents adaptations. Adaptations are a myth. Organisms were created to fit into a real world of diverse created organisms and specific environments.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/18/2021 08:20 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Here is a rough depiction of evolution.



Lightening strike, magic happens. Heres where I'm struggling. That accounts for one life form. How do you account for all the varients of life and trees and plants? Were they all created by individual lightening strikes to create their own variation of what evolution leads them to become in something like present day? What was different about all these lightening strikes to create the variations we see now in forms of life? What about the water? Where did that come from? Am I to believe earth was bombarded with ice meteors or something to that effect? That's quite a strike given the volume of water? The lightening strikes that caused life to form and the ice meteors - how come we dont see this phenomenon occur now? Birth, healing, every resource to sustain each life form, carefully working in balance. So we were created by aliens? Who created them? How did there fluke of evolution occur? Same lightening strike as earth? This fluke phenomenon seems wide spread if it created life else where? Doesnt seem such a fluke if its wide spread on other planets? What am I missing. Do we take for granted what we see and not realise the marvel that is in front of us? Life.
 Quoting: Little Lost


Life from sparks

The miller experiment produced left and right handed amino acids. Good luck producing proteins with all left handed amino acids. Statistically, if proteins could actually form without a living cell, the typical protein would be about a 50 / 50 mix of lefts and rights. What is the probability of a protein 50 amino acids long that are all left handed or all right handed?

2 x 2 x 2 ... (47 more times). Use your computer and then post your answer.

So, you have this random protein 50 amino acids long. does it do anything? Is it a viable functioning component part of the future first living cell? Only if the amino acids are in a specific sequence for a specific function. If this first cell needs an enzyme (it will. Life is impossible without them), the amino acids must be in specific sequence (the corrrctect amino acids in the correct order for all 50 amino acids). What is the probability of that happening? There are at least 20 amino acids so

20 x 20 x 20 (47 more times).

You don't need to do all the math to know that the resulting number is over 50 digits long. Now multiply these two digits together.

Or the simple way. 40 x 40 x 40 (47 more times). Use your computer and post the answer.

Yep that would be magic. Did dr Stanley miller include this with his study?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 75583697
United States
09/18/2021 08:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Once again you are mistaking on what evolution is. First, it doesn't make claims to the origins of life. There is nothing above a hypothesis on life's orgins. Evolution is is the attempt to explain the diversity of life. Period. There is not one field of science that debunks the theory. Quite the opposite. If you wish to debunk the scientific theory do it with science , not mistaking its definition. Finally, yes Darwin had a few things wrong. You know who corrected it? Science. The best answer to how did life begin is " We don't know" That's very hard for people to realize or admit.
Sol-Kathos

User ID: 80888048
Australia
09/18/2021 08:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
You're correct OP, evolution is bullshit. It's the most sacred dogma of $cience worshipping normies but so don't expect any of them to hear a bad word about their God. What they think is 'evolution' isn't and if you explain to them the principles of Darwinian evolution they do a mental double take. I suspect they like it so much because it makes them feel smart and superior in one go.

The notion things randomly change and sometimes that change is beneficial and that one in a million change manages to sire the rest of the species is completely retarded. Evolution is a theory based on several layers of demonstrably false premises.

$cience zealots will immediately bray at you for being a creation-believing jesus freak because their indoctrination only allows them to believe in extreme ideologies. Just because evolution is silly garbage, doesn't mean that creation myths are true to their literal interpretation.

What we observe in Nature is things adapting to the world around them. But adapting implies conscious interaction with the environment, and materialism can't stand such a notion. That creatures other than man could be aware is an affront to story you are trying to be sold.
 Quoting: Sol-Kathos


Adaptations are not passed on to future generations unless it is a change in the DNA which would happen at conception and not during life. In other words, survival of the fittest is a reduction in diversity from the existing variability in the DNA by the death and lower reproduction rates. No new information is added to the gene pool. New or different information is supposedly added through mutations (mistakes). The overwhelming majority if not all mutations are not beneficial to the organism so it does not survive or become dominant. Survival of the fittest prevents adaptations. Adaptations are a myth. Organisms were created to fit into a real world of diverse created organisms and specific environments.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80348993


Unless of course adapting to ones environment happens during the entire duration of an organism's life, including the time between birth and procreating. Then they absolutely can be passed onto progeny. You see very obvious observable evidence of this in human beings, with children inheriting the traits of their parent's physiques. What you think 'DNA' is is another overly complex lie of $cience to further convince you that only the high-priests can interpret the holy word. DNA is the record of the thought-form currently manifesting in physical reality.

I don't want to get into this with you because 1) You seem indoctrinated into the cult of $cience; and 2) it would take to long to individually isolate each one of your incorrect premises and provide a counterview. You'll just ignore it and continue to believe whatever your current program is.

The short version is this: Why do 'random mutations' never occur in a stable yet wholly cosmetic manner? By the logic of 'random mutation' some creatures should 'evolve' traits that have no benefit to their current environment. That 'mutations' are always beneficial relative to the environment of the creature implies that interaction with that environment must play some role. You'll try argue against this with 'time', over a long enough time the genepool is whittled down to only those best suited to survive in the environment, right? But the time element of evolution is also bullshit, based on flawed geological dogma, uniformitarianism among other things.

>Organisms were created
>created organisms

Is this a failure of language or do you not realise that such terms are incompatible with your theory?

This is one of the harder $cience delusions to dispel because of how entrenched it is so I don't fault you if it is beyond your current understanding. Kill your heroes, AC. It is the only way forward.
Order is tyranny, chaos is freedom
Sol-Kathos

User ID: 80888048
Australia
09/18/2021 08:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Once again you are mistaking on what evolution is. First, it doesn't make claims to the origins of life. There is nothing above a hypothesis on life's orgins. Evolution is is the attempt to explain the diversity of life. Period. There is not one field of science that debunks the theory. Quite the opposite. If you wish to debunk the scientific theory do it with science , not mistaking its definition. Finally, yes Darwin had a few things wrong. You know who corrected it? Science. The best answer to how did life begin is " We don't know" That's very hard for people to realize or admit.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75583697


Read the book "Shattering the myths of Darwinism" by Milton. It is exactly what you asked for, a scientific 'debunk'. What's the bet you never do???
Order is tyranny, chaos is freedom
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/18/2021 09:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Here is a rough depiction of evolution.



Lightening strike, magic happens. Heres where I'm struggling. That accounts for one life form. How do you account for all the varients of life and trees and plants? Were they all created by individual lightening strikes to create their own variation of what evolution leads them to become in something like present day? What was different about all these lightening strikes to create the variations we see now in forms of life? What about the water? Where did that come from? Am I to believe earth was bombarded with ice meteors or something to that effect? That's quite a strike given the volume of water? The lightening strikes that caused life to form and the ice meteors - how come we dont see this phenomenon occur now? Birth, healing, every resource to sustain each life form, carefully working in balance. So we were created by aliens? Who created them? How did there fluke of evolution occur? Same lightening strike as earth? This fluke phenomenon seems wide spread if it created life else where? Doesnt seem such a fluke if its wide spread on other planets? What am I missing. Do we take for granted what we see and not realise the marvel that is in front of us? Life.
 Quoting: Little Lost


Life from sparks

The miller experiment produced left and right handed amino acids. Good luck producing proteins with all left handed amino acids. Statistically, if proteins could actually form without a living cell, the typical protein would be about a 50 / 50 mix of lefts and rights. What is the probability of a protein 50 amino acids long that are all left handed or all right handed?

2 x 2 x 2 ... (47 more times). Use your computer and then post your answer.

So, you have this random protein 50 amino acids long. does it do anything? Is it a viable functioning component part of the future first living cell? Only if the amino acids are in a specific sequence for a specific function. If this first cell needs an enzyme (it will. Life is impossible without them), the amino acids must be in specific sequence (the corrrctect amino acids in the correct order for all 50 amino acids). What is the probability of that happening? There are at least 20 amino acids so

20 x 20 x 20 (47 more times).

You don't need to do all the math to know that the resulting number is over 50 digits long. Now multiply these two digits together.

Or the simple way. 40 x 40 x 40 (47 more times). Use your computer and post the answer.

Yep that would be magic. Did dr Stanley miller include this with his study?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80348993


Even if you could form (more magic) a cell from a soup of amino acids and lipids etc, it would be dead (as in , not alive). This cell will need to be able to form more proteins and also reproduce itself. It must have DNA.

I'm not sure how a DNA strand would be formed outside of a cell (more magic) or were the raw materials such as a particular type of sugar and free phosphorus to makeDNA would come from. But however this supposedly happened, the probability of this piece of DNA coding for the protein the cell needs is the same as the probability for the protein being in the correct sequence from above. You need both at the same time. Proteins that make up the first not living cell and DNA to make more protiens. These protiens need to be made of all left or all right handed amino acids. So initially the math for two protiens 50 amino acids long (ignoring the thousands needed for the first cell), one produced by chance without a cell and one broduced at the direction of DNA within the cell, the math is

40 x 40 x 40 (97 more times)

The cell will need a variety of different protiens so, more math and bigger numbers. As cells become more complex and make the jump from single cell to multi cell organism the DNA will need to become longer and be a functional code. You will not get that from copy errors and stray game rats or whatever (more magic?).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/18/2021 09:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Darn auto correct.

Game rats = gamma rays
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/18/2021 09:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
You're correct OP, evolution is bullshit. It's the most sacred dogma of $cience worshipping normies but so don't expect any of them to hear a bad word about their God. What they think is 'evolution' isn't and if you explain to them the principles of Darwinian evolution they do a mental double take. I suspect they like it so much because it makes them feel smart and superior in one go.

The notion things randomly change and sometimes that change is beneficial and that one in a million change manages to sire the rest of the species is completely retarded. Evolution is a theory based on several layers of demonstrably false premises.

$cience zealots will immediately bray at you for being a creation-believing jesus freak because their indoctrination only allows them to believe in extreme ideologies. Just because evolution is silly garbage, doesn't mean that creation myths are true to their literal interpretation.

What we observe in Nature is things adapting to the world around them. But adapting implies conscious interaction with the environment, and materialism can't stand such a notion. That creatures other than man could be aware is an affront to story you are trying to be sold.
 Quoting: Sol-Kathos


Adaptations are not passed on to future generations unless it is a change in the DNA which would happen at conception and not during life. In other words, survival of the fittest is a reduction in diversity from the existing variability in the DNA by the death and lower reproduction rates. No new information is added to the gene pool. New or different information is supposedly added through mutations (mistakes). The overwhelming majority if not all mutations are not beneficial to the organism so it does not survive or become dominant. Survival of the fittest prevents adaptations. Adaptations are a myth. Organisms were created to fit into a real world of diverse created organisms and specific environments.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80348993


Unless of course adapting to ones environment happens during the entire duration of an organism's life, including the time between birth and procreating. Then they absolutely can be passed onto progeny. You see very obvious observable evidence of this in human beings, with children inheriting the traits of their parent's physiques. What you think 'DNA' is is another overly complex lie of $cience to further convince you that only the high-priests can interpret the holy word. DNA is the record of the thought-form currently manifesting in physical reality.

I don't want to get into this with you because 1) You seem indoctrinated into the cult of $cience; and 2) it would take to long to individually isolate each one of your incorrect premises and provide a counterview. You'll just ignore it and continue to believe whatever your current program is.

The short version is this: Why do 'random mutations' never occur in a stable yet wholly cosmetic manner? By the logic of 'random mutation' some creatures should 'evolve' traits that have no benefit to their current environment. That 'mutations' are always beneficial relative to the environment of the creature implies that interaction with that environment must play some role. You'll try argue against this with 'time', over a long enough time the genepool is whittled down to only those best suited to survive in the environment, right? But the time element of evolution is also bullshit, based on flawed geological dogma, uniformitarianism among other things.

>Organisms were created
>created organisms

Is this a failure of language or do you not realise that such terms are incompatible with your theory?

This is one of the harder $cience delusions to dispel because of how entrenched it is so I don't fault you if it is beyond your current understanding. Kill your heroes, AC. It is the only way forward.
 Quoting: Sol-Kathos


For a fish to adapt to the non water environment, it will require changes to the genetic code that will be passed down to future generations. issues of coloration and size (variability within the existing genetic code)will be of no benefit when going from fish to amphibian. These issues are dealt with in a population by survival of the fittest.

Bottom line, evolution requires changes to the DNA (as well as additions to the code for increasing complexity).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/18/2021 09:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 10:29 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
The bible says God spoke the world into existence, not thought it - spoke it into existance.

1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. Genesis



Does Cymatics start explain how the world was spoken into existence. Sound has shape. Check this Sound on matter video.



Sol-tari

User ID: 76073307
Australia
09/18/2021 10:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Group A is the starting group.

They multiply, begin using all available resources.

One of group A is able to eat a different variation of food - it passes this trait to its offspring, which in turn grow in number due to less competition over said food source.

Group A and the new group B coexist on the same island, eating different food sources.

Group C did live on that second food source, but due to the competition from group B as their numbers explode, then seek another food source... the abundant numbers of group B provide an alternative.

Now you've got a couple of different finches, one subsisting on Seeds, the other insects, and a hawk that consumes both.

Amazing eh


*Glitches May Occur. Consume(D) At Own Risk
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80766059
Chile
09/18/2021 10:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Wasnt looking for trolls, just seeing what I'm missing with all this?
 Quoting: Little Lost


It is TIME and LOCATION. Take 5 bowls of sweetened oatmeal, put one under you bed, one in the freezer, one in the refrigerator, one outside and bury one under the ground. Then each day take a photo of what you see, for the next six months. You will see a huge variation from the exact same ingredients.
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 11:44 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Wasnt looking for trolls, just seeing what I'm missing with all this?
 Quoting: Little Lost


It is TIME and LOCATION. Take 5 bowls of sweetened oatmeal, put one under you bed, one in the freezer, one in the refrigerator, one outside and bury one under the ground. Then each day take a photo of what you see, for the next six months. You will see a huge variation from the exact same ingredients.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80766059


Ok, I see the point your making with regards to the enviornment being a factor. We can see that in the wide variety of creatures that inhabit the world in their various climates and surroundings. Hoe did the organism travel to various spots around the world to account for the temperature and conditions variance? Theres still the problem of how the oat came to be as well, a different strike, a different organism? But how? I'm still struggling with the lightening giving life aspect. A bolt of lightening strikes a tiny organism (where this came from I dont know) and precisely in that spot - taking into factor the size of the earth. Its the sheer impossibility of a random bolt stricking at something so small, in the water(?). But that lightening strike phenomenon occured not just once but multiple times, all accurately hitting organisms so small it's hard to comprehend. That's more than blind luck and for it to occur not just here but every where. Am I over emphasising the importance of lightening in this process?

Last Edited by Little Lost on 09/18/2021 12:05 PM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80766059
Chile
09/18/2021 01:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Wasnt looking for trolls, just seeing what I'm missing with all this?
 Quoting: Little Lost


It is TIME and LOCATION. Take 5 bowls of sweetened oatmeal, put one under you bed, one in the freezer, one in the refrigerator, one outside and bury one under the ground. Then each day take a photo of what you see, for the next six months. You will see a huge variation from the exact same ingredients.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80766059


Ok, I see the point your making with regards to the enviornment being a factor. We can see that in the wide variety of creatures that inhabit the world in their various climates and surroundings. Hoe did the organism travel to various spots around the world to account for the temperature and conditions variance? Theres still the problem of how the oat came to be as well, a different strike, a different organism? But how? I'm still struggling with the lightening giving life aspect. A bolt of lightening strikes a tiny organism (where this came from I dont know) and precisely in that spot - taking into factor the size of the earth. Its the sheer impossibility of a random bolt stricking at something so small, in the water(?). But that lightening strike phenomenon occured not just once but multiple times, all accurately hitting organisms so small it's hard to comprehend. That's more than blind luck and for it to occur not just here but every where. Am I over emphasising the importance of lightening in this process?
 Quoting: Little Lost


I am not trying to persuade you one way or the other, but give you an explanation of the general thinking on the matter. Evolutionary "theory" does have is deficiencies, for example with the discovery of epigenetics and issues surrounding the Cambrian Explosion, etc. So, who knows what we will have in 100 more years?

One of the things to note is that we are often dealing with complex systems looking for simple explanations or finding that simple systems are more complex than we imagined:

For example, who would have imagined this:



Another example, similar to that, is the Mandelbrot Set which comes from the incredibly simple equation: x = y2 + c, where you feed the output back into the equation as input and keep repeating the process. And this is what you get when when you plot it out:



So, in both of the above examples, you are looking at the same simple thing, but seen at different times.

There are lots of examples in the scientific literature of the same organism looking different in different environments, from Darwin's Finches, to red tide organisms, caterpillars/butterflies, to human beings. Even something like the parasite that causes Malaria "shape-shifts" throughout its life, depending on the environment that it is in. So, through the long processes of time you get preferred variations and eventual splits, so the theory tells us.

I would also point out that we humans are limited creatures, who struggle to create mental "chalkboard pictures" of reality in our minds in order to understand and control our environment. For example, is a flash of light a "thing" or an "event"? If you say "event" then is lightning a thing or an event, as they are essentially the same phenomenon? And then scale that up with different items, until you get to a mountain. Is a mountain a thing or an event? It, like lightning, will eventually disappear. However, go out into the world and start talking about mountains not being "things" and look at the reactions you get, people will think you are crazy.

All I can say it is complicated, science is never settled, there are always new discoveries to be made and new ways of looking at things... so, all that we can affirm is what science "currently" tells us, knowing that might change in the future. But that is the best we can do in the moment. IMHO

Anyway, I hope that helps...
Little Lost  (OP)

User ID: 80469772
United Kingdom
09/18/2021 03:00 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Wasnt looking for trolls, just seeing what I'm missing with all this?
 Quoting: Little Lost


It is TIME and LOCATION. Take 5 bowls of sweetened oatmeal, put one under you bed, one in the freezer, one in the refrigerator, one outside and bury one under the ground. Then each day take a photo of what you see, for the next six months. You will see a huge variation from the exact same ingredients.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80766059


Ok, I see the point your making with regards to the enviornment being a factor. We can see that in the wide variety of creatures that inhabit the world in their various climates and surroundings. Hoe did the organism travel to various spots around the world to account for the temperature and conditions variance? Theres still the problem of how the oat came to be as well, a different strike, a different organism? But how? I'm still struggling with the lightening giving life aspect. A bolt of lightening strikes a tiny organism (where this came from I dont know) and precisely in that spot - taking into factor the size of the earth. Its the sheer impossibility of a random bolt stricking at something so small, in the water(?). But that lightening strike phenomenon occured not just once but multiple times, all accurately hitting organisms so small it's hard to comprehend. That's more than blind luck and for it to occur not just here but every where. Am I over emphasising the importance of lightening in this process?
 Quoting: Little Lost


I am not trying to persuade you one way or the other, but give you an explanation of the general thinking on the matter. Evolutionary "theory" does have is deficiencies, for example with the discovery of epigenetics and issues surrounding the Cambrian Explosion, etc. So, who knows what we will have in 100 more years?

One of the things to note is that we are often dealing with complex systems looking for simple explanations or finding that simple systems are more complex than we imagined:

For example, who would have imagined this:



Another example, similar to that, is the Mandelbrot Set which comes from the incredibly simple equation: x = y2 + c, where you feed the output back into the equation as input and keep repeating the process. And this is what you get when when you plot it out:



So, in both of the above examples, you are looking at the same simple thing, but seen at different times.

There are lots of examples in the scientific literature of the same organism looking different in different environments, from Darwin's Finches, to red tide organisms, caterpillars/butterflies, to human beings. Even something like the parasite that causes Malaria "shape-shifts" throughout its life, depending on the environment that it is in. So, through the long processes of time you get preferred variations and eventual splits, so the theory tells us.

I would also point out that we humans are limited creatures, who struggle to create mental "chalkboard pictures" of reality in our minds in order to understand and control our environment. For example, is a flash of light a "thing" or an "event"? If you say "event" then is lightning a thing or an event, as they are essentially the same phenomenon? And then scale that up with different items, until you get to a mountain. Is a mountain a thing or an event? It, like lightning, will eventually disappear. However, go out into the world and start talking about mountains not being "things" and look at the reactions you get, people will think you are crazy.

All I can say it is complicated, science is never settled, there are always new discoveries to be made and new ways of looking at things... so, all that we can affirm is what science "currently" tells us, knowing that might change in the future. But that is the best we can do in the moment. IMHO

Anyway, I hope that helps...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80766059



A respectful answer on your beliefs, one which crosses to a knowledge beyond my comprehension and I dont mind admitting that. I respect you acknowledge there are still question Mark's in what we know currently, there is the middle ground we both hold, the uncertainty and the belief in what we believe we have both discovered from our own findings. I have claimed some pretty outrageous things on this forum, it would be so easy to take me apart on what I have proclaimed alone. But it's what I proclaim that stems my belief that there is a god and the world is not what it seems. I fully respect they are events I can not prove and sound outright outlandish. But experience them I have, without explination to the why's and what nots, these are answers I do not know. I just know there is more than we are led to believe and for that I have to question the true nature of what surrounds us. Once i surrendered to the fact that there is a being far more intelligent than any man or alien on earth or universe, you can appreciate the impossible seems possible, for he can do anything. Unfortunately, hes not the only one with what we would deem special abilities and it's more that aspect I have witnessed. For if they exist then I can be darn sure God does.

Thank you for your answer, I appreciate the insight and offer my apologies that I dont have the intellect to debate on your level. I have seen the phenomenon of repeating patterns before. Like the veins on a leaf looking like the veins in our body. I know there are many more examples of this repeating pattern. I guess that doesnt make me doubt any less there is a creator. Thanks once more.

Last Edited by Little Lost on 09/18/2021 03:04 PM
wisconsin

User ID: 80878816
United States
09/18/2021 08:41 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
.
... few really want to THINK about the logic ...
.
... had his entire series on tape when it fist came out ...
.
.

Our family celebrates The Lord's Feasts:
[link to www.grafted-promise.net]

Fools and the dead don't change their minds. Fools won't and the dead can't.

When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar. You are only telling the world that you fear what he might say. Quoting: CountryWise

Amos 5:13 - Therefore at such a time the prudent person keeps silent, for it is an evil time.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/19/2021 12:22 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
bump
Nibiru*is*flat

User ID: 79875786
United States
09/19/2021 12:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
I was watching a debate recently , and the pro side for evolution, brought up some breakthroughs in autocatalytic network analysis.
I had remembered these process from simple organic chemistry.
Anyway it's an interesting concept. They are molecules that self organize, and literally build themselves , using available elements , and entropy.
Here is a paper on it.
Anyway thinking about these processes , led to a lot of symmetrical solutions one could apply it to, such as the propagation of information organically, within a system of humans etc.
Humans self organize , and so does information via entropy..for example the media
Nibiru*is*flat

User ID: 79875786
United States
09/19/2021 12:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
I was watching a debate recently , and the pro side for evolution, brought up some breakthroughs in autocatalytic network analysis.
I had remembered these process from simple organic chemistry.
Anyway it's an interesting concept. They are molecules that self organize, and literally build themselves , using available elements , and entropy.
Here is a paper on it.
Anyway thinking about these processes , led to a lot of symmetrical solutions one could apply it to, such as the propagation of information organically, within a system of humans etc.
Humans self organize , and so does information via entropy..for example the media
 Quoting: Nibiru*is*flat


Oh hears a link for a paper
[link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]
Nibiru*is*flat

User ID: 79875786
United States
09/19/2021 12:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
I was watching a debate recently , and the pro side for evolution, brought up some breakthroughs in autocatalytic network analysis.
I had remembered these process from simple organic chemistry.
Anyway it's an interesting concept. They are molecules that self organize, and literally build themselves , using available elements , and entropy.
Here is a paper on it.
Anyway thinking about these processes , led to a lot of symmetrical solutions one could apply it to, such as the propagation of information organically, within a system of humans etc.
Humans self organize , and so does information via entropy..for example the media
 Quoting: Nibiru*is*flat


Oh hears a link for a paper
[link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]
 Quoting: Nibiru*is*flat


One breakthrough is realizing , RNA virus use these processes. And amino acids can form this way.
So actually they already have a process in which molecules can self organize into amino acids.
It's a very large step for the pro argument
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 80348993
United States
09/19/2021 01:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
I was watching a debate recently , and the pro side for evolution, brought up some breakthroughs in autocatalytic network analysis.
I had remembered these process from simple organic chemistry.
Anyway it's an interesting concept. They are molecules that self organize, and literally build themselves , using available elements , and entropy.
Here is a paper on it.
Anyway thinking about these processes , led to a lot of symmetrical solutions one could apply it to, such as the propagation of information organically, within a system of humans etc.
Humans self organize , and so does information via entropy..for example the media
 Quoting: Nibiru*is*flat


I was watching a debate recently , and the pro side for evolution, brought up some breakthroughs in autocatalytic network analysis.
I had remembered these process from simple organic chemistry.
Anyway it's an interesting concept. They are molecules that self organize, and literally build themselves , using available elements , and entropy.
Here is a paper on it.
Anyway thinking about these processes , led to a lot of symmetrical solutions one could apply it to, such as the propagation of information organically, within a system of humans etc.
Humans self organize , and so does information via entropy..for example the media
 Quoting: Nibiru*is*flat


So you have two molecules that can form each other.

Are all the component amino acids exclusively left handed or right handed?
Do they also have a function in a living cell?
Or is it just random amino acids in a protein that can be produced apart from a genetic code?
Is there a corresponding RNA or DNA sting to produce more in a living cell?
Can this process occur in nature or is it strictly an experiment in chemistry?
Most protiens have hundreds of amino acids. Do these autocatylic molecules ever get that big in the lab?
A Jackson

User ID: 80113656
United States
09/19/2021 01:30 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Evolution
Here is a rough depiction of evolution.



- The video is wrong.

Lightening strike, magic happens. Heres where I'm struggling. That accounts for one life form.

- No, many may be created or none. Most aren’t life but instead complex molecules like viruses. Actually less than virus.

How do you account for all the varients of life and trees and plants?

- That’s the whole thing about evolution, you give a creature a drier climate it adapts or it dies. Give one species that can reproduce at a high rate enough time and some will survive in almost any climate. You have to look at the whole planet and the changes going on, like mountain formation, erosion, and ice ages.

Were they all created by individual lightening strikes to create their own variation of what evolution leads them to become in something like present day?

- No, this is not evolution. Evolution is not (pouph) magic. The lightning strike may create several different viable forms of reproducible proteins. Those evolve into more complex proteins and after a very long time some change into life as we know it.

What was different about all these lightening strikes to create the variations we see now in forms of life?

- This is not evolution. It’s absurd.

What about the water?

- Water is good. -? Life on earth requires water, on other planets there may be life from silicon or methane.

Where did that come from?

- Water came from comets and early atmosphere creation.

Am I to believe earth was bombarded with ice meteors or something to that effect?

- No you don’t have to believe anything at all, but the earth is covered in craters and is covered in water. Look up solar system creation to help.

That's quite a strike given the volume of water?

- No lots of little strikes filled the oceans.

The lightening strikes that caused life to form and the ice meteors - how come we dont see this phenomenon occur now?

- We do. Mostly they are undersea or in hot springs around volcanoes. Also, the simpler forms of life are already here, so if a lightning bolt hits a warm sea full of minerals it creates life that already exists.

Birth, healing, every resource to sustain each life form, carefully working in balance. So we were created by aliens?

- No evidence of alien interaction.

Who created them?

- No evidence of aliens.

How did there fluke of evolution occur?

- Evolution is not a fluke, it was inevitable.

Same lightening strike as earth?

- Yes it can happen on other planets in other places at other times.

This fluke phenomenon seems wide spread if it created life else where?

- Yes, the universe is rather large.

Doesnt seem such a fluke if its wide spread on other planets?

- We don’t know if it is widespread on other planets. There are an abundance of organic molecules on other planets which points towards life of some kind.

What am I missing. Do we take for granted what we see and not realise the marvel that is in front of us? Life.

- Life is a marvel whether you believe in evolution, Christian creation, or any of the other thousand creation myths.

If you put earth life outside the atmosphere most of it will die. Some life forms may stay viable for very long time and may ‘pollute’ nearby planets with life.

The opposite is true as well.

It’s late … sleepy …
 Quoting: Little Lost

Smoke me a kipper, I’ll be back for breakfast.

If you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are doomed to live under the rule of fools. — Plato

“AI is kind of a fancy thing, first of all it’s two letters. It means artificial intelligence.” Kamala Harris VPOTUS





GLP